Talking Footy

within the areas they represent

GWS are well behind all 16 NRL clubs with the Sharks being the lowest on about 4500 in their area

GWS & the VFL..

Raiderdave wrote:

within the areas they represent

GWS are well behind all 16 NRL clubs with the Sharks being the lowest on about 4500 in their area

GWS & the VFL..

1. They represent the ACT and they are playing games there so the number of members in areas they represent is more than the sharks!

2. Why does it even matter? They have more financial support than the sharks and titans because of these members, and will probably end up with more members than half a dozen NrL teams.

3. You facts on the sharks are probably bs anyway because you have no evidence, as usual.

4. This is supposed to be RL heartland. Do you see the Melbourne AFL clubs with less members than the storm?

5. You're an idiot!

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

within the areas they represent

GWS are well behind all 16 NRL clubs with the Sharks being the lowest on about 4500 in their area

GWS & the VFL..

1. They represent the ACT and they are playing games there so the number of members in areas they represent is more than the sharks!

2. Why does it even matter? They have more financial support than the sharks and titans because of these members, and will probably end up with more members than half a dozen NrL teams.

3. You facts on the sharks are probably bs anyway because you have no evidence, as usual.

4. This is supposed to be RL heartland. Do you see the Melbourne AFL clubs with less members than the storm?

5. You're an idiot!

oh... where is the reference to Canberra or the ACT in their name peanut ?
they are no more an ACT team then the Swans

it matters because it shows they were never wanted or needed .... they are a mistake & nothing but a VFL flog job
they will be a miserable failure

my stats on the Sharks would be spot on...as all things I say are

our Heartland has ova 40K members ... nearly 20 times GWS

you are a w@nker

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

within the areas they represent

GWS are well behind all 16 NRL clubs with the Sharks being the lowest on about 4500 in their area

GWS & the VFL..

1. They represent the ACT and they are playing games there so the number of members in areas they represent is more than the sharks!

2. Why does it even matter? They have more financial support than the sharks and titans because of these members, and will probably end up with more members than half a dozen NrL teams.

3. You facts on the sharks are probably bs anyway because you have no evidence, as usual.

4. This is supposed to be RL heartland. Do you see the Melbourne AFL clubs with less members than the storm?

5. You're an idiot!

oh... where is the reference to Canberra or the ACT in their name peanut ?
they are no more an ACT team then the Swans

it matters because it shows they were never wanted or needed .... they are a mistake & nothing but a VFL flog job
they will be a miserable failure

my stats on the Sharks would be spot on...as all things I say are

our Heartland has ova 40K members ... nearly 20 times GWS

you are a w@nker

Why do you think they used the word "greater"? They represent the ACT and play games there and target the region with memberships.

The giants are just starting and are already above some NRL teams for members. No doubt their crowds will be as well.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

within the areas they represent

GWS are well behind all 16 NRL clubs with the Sharks being the lowest on about 4500 in their area

GWS & the VFL..

1. They represent the ACT and they are playing games there so the number of members in areas they represent is more than the sharks!

2. Why does it even matter? They have more financial support than the sharks and titans because of these members, and will probably end up with more members than half a dozen NrL teams.

3. You facts on the sharks are probably bs anyway because you have no evidence, as usual.

4. This is supposed to be RL heartland. Do you see the Melbourne AFL clubs with less members than the storm?

5. You're an idiot!

oh... where is the reference to Canberra or the ACT in their name peanut ?
they are no more an ACT team then the Swans

it matters because it shows they were never wanted or needed .... they are a mistake & nothing but a VFL flog job
they will be a miserable failure

my stats on the Sharks would be spot on...as all things I say are

our Heartland has ova 40K members ... nearly 20 times GWS

you are a w@nker

Lame troll attempt.

Clearly shows someone is getting nervous about the growing Giants.

Hi Raider

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

1. They represent the ACT and they are playing games there so the number of members in areas they represent is more than the sharks!

2. Why does it even matter? They have more financial support than the sharks and titans because of these members, and will probably end up with more members than half a dozen NrL teams.

3. You facts on the sharks are probably bs anyway because you have no evidence, as usual.

4. This is supposed to be RL heartland. Do you see the Melbourne AFL clubs with less members than the storm?

5. You're an idiot!

oh... where is the reference to Canberra or the ACT in their name peanut ?
they are no more an ACT team then the Swans

it matters because it shows they were never wanted or needed .... they are a mistake & nothing but a VFL flog job
they will be a miserable failure

my stats on the Sharks would be spot on...as all things I say are

our Heartland has ova 40K members ... nearly 20 times GWS

you are a w@nker

Why do you think they used the word "greater"? They represent the ACT and play games there and target the region with memberships.

The giants are just starting and are already above some NRL teams for members. No doubt their crowds will be as well.

Since when has the ACT been part of GREATER western Sydney you utter knob

gawd F me ... I know VFL fans are stupid
but this one takes the cake



the midgits have 2500 members in western sydney ...
we have clubs in the same area with more then 4 times that many .............& our smallest club the sharks . have nearly double

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

1. They represent the ACT and they are playing games there so the number of members in areas they represent is more than the sharks!

2. Why does it even matter? They have more financial support than the sharks and titans because of these members, and will probably end up with more members than half a dozen NrL teams.

3. You facts on the sharks are probably bs anyway because you have no evidence, as usual.

4. This is supposed to be RL heartland. Do you see the Melbourne AFL clubs with less members than the storm?

5. You're an idiot!

oh... where is the reference to Canberra or the ACT in their name peanut ?
they are no more an ACT team then the Swans

it matters because it shows they were never wanted or needed .... they are a mistake & nothing but a VFL flog job
they will be a miserable failure

my stats on the Sharks would be spot on...as all things I say are

our Heartland has ova 40K members ... nearly 20 times GWS

you are a w@nker

Lame troll attempt.

Clearly shows someone is getting nervous about the growing Giants.

Hi Raider

ooh ... I'm trembling in my boots

with their army of............ ................. 2500 .. they may over run the joint

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

oh... where is the reference to Canberra or the ACT in their name peanut ?
they are no more an ACT team then the Swans

it matters because it shows they were never wanted or needed .... they are a mistake & nothing but a VFL flog job
they will be a miserable failure

my stats on the Sharks would be spot on...as all things I say are

our Heartland has ova 40K members ... nearly 20 times GWS

you are a w@nker

Why do you think they used the word "greater"? They represent the ACT and play games there and target the region with memberships.

The giants are just starting and are already above some NRL teams for members. No doubt their crowds will be as well.

Since when has the ACT been part of GREATER western Sydney you utter knob

gawd F me ... I know VFL fans are stupid
but this one takes the cake



the midgits have 2500 members in western sydney ...
we have clubs in the same area with more then 4 times that many .............& our smallest club the sharks . have nearly double

Youre part of the NRL crew who say the term Greater Western Sydney is never used in Sydney! Why Is that? Because it refers to a large area west of Sydney including the ACT knob brain! That is why they are playing over a 1/3 of their home games there and have targeted the region for memberships!

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Why do you think they used the word "greater"? They represent the ACT and play games there and target the region with memberships.

The giants are just starting and are already above some NRL teams for members. No doubt their crowds will be as well.

Since when has the ACT been part of GREATER western Sydney you utter knob

gawd F me ... I know VFL fans are stupid
but this one takes the cake



the midgits have 2500 members in western sydney ...
we have clubs in the same area with more then 4 times that many .............& our smallest club the sharks . have nearly double

Youre part of the NRL crew who say the term Greater Western Sydney is never used in Sydney! Why Is that? Because it refers to a large area west of Sydney including the ACT knob brain! That is why they are playing over a 1/3 of their home games there and have targeted the region for memberships!

a Large area west of Sydney ????

what the fark
so how large ?

everything between the anzac bridge & geraldton ?


& you wonder why RL fans say the VFL is full of w@nkers
what an utter toss job
its F'ing hilarious that there are people stupid enough to lap this garbage up ...........then again
we are talking about VFL fans

so whats 38% of 7641

nearly 3000

come on the Midgits

lets see if you can break the magical ..... 3000... barrier before Sat Nite